可食地景美感的產生機制：公共性期待與經營者決策的雙路徑架構

Abstract

隨著全球都市化與氣候變遷加劇，可食地景(Edible Landscape)作為「以自然為本的解決方案」(Nature-based Solutions, NbS)日益受到重視。在臺灣，可食地景已從民間自發性實踐轉向系統性政策推動，如臺北市田園城市計畫，使其快速從私人領域擴展至公園、校園等公共場域。然而，當可食地景進入高度可視性的公共空間時，常面臨美感評價的顯著歧異：一般大眾普遍期待「整潔有序」的景觀呈現，而實踐者則強調「自然、生態與多樣性」的價值追求，使美感成為涉及審美認知、社會期待與治理實務的衝突性議題。 本研究旨在探討公共性期待如何影響可食地景的美感生成，以及經營者如何在「社會期待（整潔規範）」與「生態信念（自然價值）」之間進行協商與平衡，進而提出「雙路徑分析架構」：外部路徑聚焦於公共性期待如何透過社會凝視與規範壓力影響景觀管理；內部路徑則探討經營者如何基於生態信念與風險管理進行決策。 研究採用探索式序列混合方法(QUAL→QUAN)。質性階段以建構主義紮根理論為基礎，對13位具豐富實務經驗的可食地景經營者進行深度訪談與現地觀察，提煉核心概念並建構初步理論模型。量化階段依據質性發現開發測量量表，回收629份有效問卷，透過結構方程模式(Structural Equation Modeling, SEM)驗證「公共性期待」、「經營者決策」、「管理行為」、「景觀與設施整合」、「實踐美學」、「分享互惠」間的路徑關係。 研究發現管理行為扮演關鍵的「轉譯機制」角色，是將抽象價值信念轉化為具體空間品質與美感體驗的核心中介歷程。此外，公共性程度呈現顯著的調節效應：在高度公共空間，公共壓力直接轉化為規範性管理行為；在低公共性空間，外部壓力則內化為經營者的審美自律，呈現「審美自治」特徵。研究揭示可食地景的美感並非純粹視覺欣賞，而是結合勞動、收穫、分享與自然觀察的「實踐美學」，包含正向情緒體驗、人際情感連結以及與土地的深層關係。經營者透過治理(訂立規則)、設計(外整內野策略)、溝通(導覽解說)與學習(知識進修)等協商策略，在社會期待與個人理念間取得動態平衡。 研究結論指出，可食地景的美感並非靜態的形式配置，而是涉及多元行動者、持續協商與動態治理的社會過程。理論貢獻方面，本研究建立整合公共性期待、價值信念與管理實務的分析框架，解釋美感衝突的社會機制與生成邏輯。實務建議方面，應將管理思維納入初期設計考量，採取分區管理策略（高可視區強調秩序、核心區保留生態彈性），並強化成果可視性（如設置亮點展示、舉辦分享活動），以促進社會連結與公共認同，推動可食地景的永續發展。

As global urbanization and climate change intensify, edible landscapes are increasingly recognized as a form of Nature-based Solutions (NbS). In Taiwan, edible landscapes have evolved from grassroots initiatives into systematic, policy-driven programs facilitating their rapid expansion from private domains into highly visible public spaces such as parks and school campuses. However, when edible landscapes enter public realms, they frequently encounter pronounced aesthetic tensions: while the general public tends to expect landscapes that appear neat and orderly, practitioners prioritize values associated with naturalness, ecology, and biodiversity. Consequently, aesthetics becomes a contested domain shaped by aesthetic perception, social expectations, and governance practices. This study examines how expectations of publicness influence the aesthetic formation of edible landscapes and how operators negotiate and balance “Public expectations (norms of neatness)” with “Ecological beliefs (values of naturalness).” A dual-pathway analytical framework is proposed. The external pathway investigates how public expectations affect landscape management through social gaze and normative pressure, whereas the internal pathway explores how operators’ decision-making is guided by ecological beliefs and risk management considerations. An exploratory sequential mixed-methods design (QUAL→QUAN) was employed. The qualitative phase, grounded in constructivist grounded theory, involved in-depth interviews and field observations with 13 experienced edible landscape operators, resulting in the identification of core concepts and the development of a preliminary theoretical model. Based on these findings, the quantitative phase constructed measurement scales and collected 629 valid questionnaires. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to test the relationships among publicness expectations, operator decision-making, management behaviors, landscape–facility integration, practiced aesthetics, and sharing reciprocity. The results indicate that management behaviors function as a critical “translation mechanism,” mediating the transformation of abstract value beliefs into tangible spatial qualities and aesthetic experiences. The degree of publicness exerts a significant moderating effect: in highly public spaces, public pressure is directly translated into normative management practices, whereas in spaces with lower publicness, external pressures are internalized as operators’ aesthetic self-discipline, reflecting a mode of aesthetic autonomy. Furthermore, the study demonstrates that the aesthetics of edible landscapes extend beyond visual appreciation, constituting a form of “practiced aesthetics” that integrates labor, harvesting, sharing, and engagement with nature. This aesthetic experience encompasses positive emotions, interpersonal connections, and deep relational ties to the land. Operators maintain a dynamic balance between societal expectations and personal ideals through negotiation strategies including governance (rule-setting), design (an “orderly exterior–wild interior” approach), communication (guided tours and interpretation), and continuous learning. In conclusion, the aesthetics of edible landscapes should be understood not as static formal compositions but as socially constructed processes involving multiple actors, ongoing negotiation, and dynamic governance. Theoretically, this study offers an integrated analytical framework linking public expectations, value beliefs, and management practices to elucidate the social mechanisms and generative logic underlying aesthetic conflict. Practically, the findings suggest incorporating management considerations into early design stages, adopting zoned management strategies (emphasizing order in high-visibility areas while retaining ecological flexibility in core zones) and enhancing the visibility of outcomes (e.g., showcase areas and sharing events) to strengthen social connections and public recognition, thereby supporting the sustainable development of edible landscapes.